A few comments:
1. In section 1, it says "RDF is based on a graph syntax, which is
typically serialized using XML.". I think it would be good to
make clear here that the RDF graph syntax is not equivalent
to the XML infoset, and that the XML serialization really
constitutes a "recipe" for constructing the conceptual graph.
Alot of folks seem to get confused when the RDF graph doesn't
mirror the RDF/XML or visa versa, so making this clear up front
may be helpful.
2. In section 2, it says "RDF builds on XML". I don't think
this is accurate. RDF uses XML to serialize its graph structures,
but is not an extension of XML, but only includes an application
of XML.
3. In 2.2, a stated design goal is "Use XML schema datatypes". I
think it would be better to say "Support the use of XML Schema
datatypes". Otherwise, it may be taken to imply that XML Schema
datatypes are integrated with or into RDF directly, which they
are not (and IMO should not be). Ahh, yes, I see that this is
clearer in the discussion of this bullet item, but still, perhaps
the bullet item could be clearer.
4. In 2.4.3, perhaps "are not covered by this recommendation."
could be expressed more strongly as "are not licensed by this
recommendation for interchange of RDF graphs".
Cheers,
Patrick
--
Patrick Stickler Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist Fax: +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Graham Klyne [mailto:GK@NineByNine.org]
> Sent: 07 August, 2002 23:44
> To: Dave Beckett
> Cc: RDF core WG
> Subject: Re: RDF Concepts and Abstract Data Model: 2002-08-05
>
>
>
> At 06:56 PM 8/7/02 +0100, Dave Beckett wrote:
> >the www-archive copy is truncated in section 2.5.
>
> Hmmm... so it is... buggy software :-(
>
> I've attached a ZIP this time, and it seems OK.
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2002Aug/0003.html
>
> #g
>
>
> -------------------
> Graham Klyne
> <GK@NineByNine.org>
>
>